Display posts from previous
Sort by

So who are the 'problem players?"

1 by RAFritchey
I'm taking this from the GDT to make it its own discussion
ratonmono wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 1:19 pm
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 12:58 pm Just need to get the Blues drunk in an Uber and we'll get all the dirt.
Funnily enough a buddy of mine is an uber driver and picked up a few of the boys a while back. Not naming names but I think a few of the guys we shed over the past couple years are missed in the room big time. Too many grumpy fucks and introverts on the club now.
Well, I can certainly say we miss Reaves, but Vegas is his 3rd team in as many years for a reason. Should we have offered more than 2 years/$5.6 mil to entice him back last Summer? It's easy to say 'yes' in hindsight, but I don't think many would have at the time.

It would have been GREAT to keep Shattenkirk as well, but he was dead-set on playing in NYC, and EVERYONE knew it, which is why trading him for anything significant was virtually impossible. The Rangers gave him 4 years/$26.6 mil hoping he could be a 'real' #1 D, and, well, he hasn't nearly performed up to that, defensively OR offensively. He has 8 points in 27 games this season, Vince Dunn is both outscoring him AND playing better D so far this season.

Losing Backes hurt, but he was already starting his inevitable decline, and there was no way we were going to match (or top) the 5 years @ 6 mil Boston gave him. He's not even half-way through that contract and only has 4 points in 22 games so far this season. We'd be SCREAMING to dump him off for nothing and 'play the kids' if he were still here.

Likewise, Brouwer was a big part of the team that went to the WCF, but we weren't going to match 4 years @ $4.5 mil. Even Calgary regretted it and bought him out halfway through. Maybe we could have brought him back as an older, cheaper alternative to Maroon this past summer, but, again, we'd be screaming to cut him and his 7 points this season to get him out of the way younger players.

A LOT of people were glad Oshie was traded to break up the 'boy band' and everyone KNEW he was an immature, disruptive influence in the locker room, whatever he did on the ice, right?

Berglund and Sobotka were run out of the place on a rail, don't even pretend that virtually everyone here wanted to see them gone for a bag of pucks if need be. Jaskin, likewise, people wanted gone in the worst way.

Would we have paid $2.3 mil over 2 years for a 34 year or Brodziak? He's got 3 points so far. Upshall still isn't playing, after being released from a PTO in Edmonton, citing his continuing knee injury.

People HATED Steve Ott while he was here. Experience, 'intangibles,' all of the things people thought weren't worth the whole THREE GOALS he scored in 128 games as a Blue. He retired the year after he left here.

Sure, Bozak hasn't done much for 3 years @ $5mil, but, arguably, that was partly a strategic move to get ROR. Would we really have rather brought back Stastny for more than 3 years @ $6.5 mil to outbid Vegas? (Stastny's only played 3 games so far this year, BTW)

So who is it that we miss so much from the last few years? Paajarvi? Lehtera? Yakupov? Rattie?

We may have 'locker room issues,' but at some point the players need to look within themselves and become better professionals not just on the ice, but in practices, the locker room, team functions, etc. They don't need to all be 'buddy-buddy,' but at this level, there's a lot more to dedication to the franchise than just what's on the ice.

As always, just my humble opinion there.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

2 by NHLTIM
RAFritchey wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:42 pm I'm taking this from the GDT to make it its own discussion
ratonmono wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 1:19 pm
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 12:58 pm Just need to get the Blues drunk in an Uber and we'll get all the dirt.
Funnily enough a buddy of mine is an uber driver and picked up a few of the boys a while back. Not naming names but I think a few of the guys we shed over the past couple years are missed in the room big time. Too many grumpy fucks and introverts on the club now.
Well, I can certainly say we miss Reaves, but Vegas is his 3rd team in as many years for a reason. Should we have offered more than 2 years/$5.6 mil to entice him back last Summer? It's easy to say 'yes' in hindsight, but I don't think many would have at the time.

It would have been GREAT to keep Shattenkirk as well, but he was dead-set on playing in NYC, and EVERYONE knew it, which is why trading him for anything significant was virtually impossible. The Rangers gave him 4 years/$26.6 mil hoping he could be a 'real' #1 D, and, well, he hasn't nearly performed up to that, defensively OR offensively. He has 8 points in 27 games this season, Vince Dunn is both outscoring him AND playing better D so far this season.

Losing Backes hurt, but he was already starting his inevitable decline, and there was no way we were going to match (or top) the 5 years @ 6 mil Boston gave him. He's not even half-way through that contract and only has 4 points in 22 games so far this season. We'd be SCREAMING to dump him off for nothing and 'play the kids' if he were still here.

Likewise, Brouwer was a big part of the team that went to the WCF, but we weren't going to match 4 years @ $4.5 mil. Even Calgary regretted it and bought him out halfway through. Maybe we could have brought him back as an older, cheaper alternative to Maroon this past summer, but, again, we'd be screaming to cut him and his 7 points this season to get him out of the way younger players.

A LOT of people were glad Oshie was traded to break up the 'boy band' and everyone KNEW he was an immature, disruptive influence in the locker room, whatever he did on the ice, right?

Berglund and Sobotka were run out of the place on a rail, don't even pretend that virtually everyone here wanted to see them gone for a bag of pucks if need be. Jaskin, likewise, people wanted gone in the worst way.

Would we have paid $2.3 mil over 2 years for a 34 year or Brodziak? He's got 3 points so far. Upshall still isn't playing, after being released from a PTO in Edmonton, citing his continuing knee injury.

People HATED Steve Ott while he was here. Experience, 'intangibles,' all of the things people thought weren't worth the whole THREE GOALS he scored in 128 games as a Blue. He retired the year after he left here.

Sure, Bozak hasn't done much for 3 years @ $5mil, but, arguably, that was partly a strategic move to get ROR. Would we really have rather brought back Stastny for more than 3 years @ $6.5 mil to outbid Vegas? (Stastny's only played 3 games so far this year, BTW)

So who is it that we miss so much from the last few years? Paajarvi? Lehtera? Yakupov? Rattie?

We may have 'locker room issues,' but at some point the players need to look within themselves and become better professionals not just on the ice, but in practices, the locker room, team functions, etc. They don't need to all be 'buddy-buddy,' but at this level, there's a lot more to dedication to the franchise than just what's on the ice.

As always, just my humble opinion there.
How long do you suggest we wait that out because apparently it's not happening. Apparently these guys stick with their cliques like a bunch of 12 year old school girls.
Official "Bitch Ass" Fan and proud of it"

"Suck a dick Johansen"

"Official Sponsor of the Legend....Jeremy Roenick"

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

4 by barnburner
How many more coaches have to bite the dust before this nonsense is over?
Whoever the problem children are, Army needs to get their ass gone tomorrow - if not sooner.
If someone offered me free front row tickets to watch these half efforts, I wouldn't make the drive over there. I'm on the verge of cancelling my Sling service until baseball season.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

6 by bradleygt89
While stability is great for an organization, didn't both the Penguins and Kings fire their coaches and/or GM when they won the SC recently?

As to the players, since RAF did a great job of pointing out who left as a FA or was traded, here is who are the core players left (been a part of the Blues for at least 4 years):

Steen
Perron (including him since he was a developed player by the Blues and has been here for the coaching changes under DA)
Tarasenko
Schwartz
Fabbri (started 4 years ago, but missed a season. Maybe his hair is the issue?).

JayBo
Petro
JEd

Allen

9 players who make up the 'core' - everyone else is new. Do you move all 9, or 2 of the 9, 4 of the 9...at what point do you reach the turnover needed? Also, since it is only 9 who make up the core, and there are 13 'new' players, shouldn't the 'new players' have a stronger voice? Gang the fuck up on the core and beat them senseless until they get their shit together?

On the management side, DA, Al Mc, Stillman, Tkachuk, etc....is the problem from there? Who defines the culture?

Does winning create a culture of winning, or does the culture of winning create the wins? Is it all attitude/motivation? Why are they not motivated?
"Do Only Good Everyday"

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

7 by BillP
I'm not going to play the who's who in points because that's a moot point - no pun intended. It doesn't mean that's what those players would be doing here if they were here or that they aren't contributing in other ways where they're at either. Rangers were like on a 8-1-1 streak recently & Shatty has been getting some praise lately despite the slow start in points, Boston still wins with the same gritty style, and Brouwer is actually playing well in Florida. This team lost some character as well as some physicality and it shows. The team could use a few bowling balls but instead it's a team full of pins. I'm okay with it though because I want that top pick in the draft. I just want a new GM to run things going forward. Army wasn't hired for a rebuild so he should go. He shouldn't get dibs on the fun to put this back together.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

10 by BillP
BluesSK wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:06 pm Ott is still here. He's part of the old boys club.

We've had some notable departures off the ice in Kelly Chase and Barrett Jackman. Also Brett Hull quietly disappeared from the organization.

Just spitballing but some of the issues may not just be player related.
Hull's not around anymore?

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

11 by BluesSK
BillP wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:27 pm
BluesSK wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:06 pm Ott is still here. He's part of the old boys club.

We've had some notable departures off the ice in Kelly Chase and Barrett Jackman. Also Brett Hull quietly disappeared from the organization.

Just spitballing but some of the issues may not just be player related.
Hull's not around anymore?
My mistake. He's a Blues ambassador now.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

12 by Cotton McKnight
RAFritchey wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:42 pm I'm taking this from the GDT to make it its own discussion
ratonmono wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 1:19 pm
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 12:58 pm Just need to get the Blues drunk in an Uber and we'll get all the dirt.
We may have 'locker room issues,' but at some point the players need to look within themselves and become better professionals not just on the ice, but in practices, the locker room, team functions, etc. They don't need to all be 'buddy-buddy,' but at this level, there's a lot more to dedication to the franchise than just what's on the ice.

As always, just my humble opinion there.
They all just need to shut up and look to the bold above.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

13 by UMSLBlues12
Berglund always came up as a guy who was everyone's friend, kept things light, was funny, etc. Reaves was supposedly the same way. Looking at our team no one sticks out as those kind of guys anymore. I'd say most of them are super serious type people, nothing wrong with that, but probably need more variety in the room.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have traded Berglund or re-signed Reaves or anything. Perhaps just thinking about what guys meant in the room in addition to on the ice could have helped in signing certain guys to replace guys like that in the room.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

14 by STLBlueshistory
barnburner wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:03 pm How many more coaches have to bite the dust before this nonsense is over?
Whoever the problem children are, Army needs to get their ass gone tomorrow - if not sooner.
Gee. Just what I want. Army making the changes. Her is the sole person responsible for creating this mess and the desire is to have him fix it? It's one thing if he was restricted on payroll. On of the highest payrolls in the league the past 2 seasons and will miss the playoffs both years. Complete failure on the past of the President of Hockey Operations & GM. His personality (or lack of) has infected the whole organization.

No thanks. His ass is the one who should be gone first.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

15 by Southsidetony
UMSLBlues12 wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:41 am Berglund always came up as a guy who was everyone's friend, kept things light, was funny, etc. Reaves was supposedly the same way. Looking at our team no one sticks out as those kind of guys anymore. I'd say most of them are super serious type people, nothing wrong with that, but probably need more variety in the room.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have traded Berglund or re-signed Reaves or anything. Perhaps just thinking about what guys meant in the room in addition to on the ice could have helped in signing certain guys to replace guys like that in the room.
I think the problem with Bergy was he was only a 30pt guy and to make 4mil a year, I think he needed 20 more pts a season.. Sure, probably a jokester in the locker room, but it is a business, too.. I do believe there might not be any jokester in the locker room now.. Usually its a veteran, maybe ROR is but he's kind of the new guy so hard to tell, especially with the season they are having..

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

16 by BillP.
STLBlueshistory wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:56 am
barnburner wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:03 pm How many more coaches have to bite the dust before this nonsense is over?
Whoever the problem children are, Army needs to get their ass gone tomorrow - if not sooner.
Gee. Just what I want. Army making the changes. Her is the sole person responsible for creating this mess and the desire is to have him fix it? It's one thing if he was restricted on payroll. On of the highest payrolls in the league the past 2 seasons and will miss the playoffs both years. Complete failure on the past of the President of Hockey Operations & GM. His personality (or lack of) has infected the whole organization.

No thanks. His ass is the one who should be gone first.
Agreed. He wasn't rehired for a rebuild. A new GM with a vision needs to take over. I'm guessing if the Blues hit an abyss, and run off a serious losing streak that Army might actually get fired this season. But it will take a serious losing streak IMO to make that happen. The bottom of all bottoms - ha

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

17 by BlueinNy
Just think how you would feel if the team you were on let Hutton go for Johnson, Elliott go for Allen. There's no confidence between the pipes. As soon as they got into the shootout a few nights ago I new it was over, as did the team. Everyone focuses on the skaters, it's not them it's the shit show we've endured at goalie the last few years that is eroding their confidence. And at that point it's all Armstrong. That's just my opinion, but worse teams with better goaltending are way ahead of us in the league.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

19 by Southsidetony
Ozzies09tc wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:53 am
Southsidetony wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:23 am
I think the problem with Bergy was he was only a 30pt guy and to make 4mil a year
And who signed him to that contract?

Or steentangibles?

Or allen? (Tho recently he has been deserving)

I think we see where the problem is...
Steen's contract has to be the worst in a while.. 45 point guy getting about 6 mil a year.. Joe Pavelski and Tyler Segin make the same???? Both avg 63pts

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

20 by insideout
BillP. wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:29 am
STLBlueshistory wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:56 am
barnburner wrote: Thu Dec 06, 2018 5:03 pm How many more coaches have to bite the dust before this nonsense is over?
Whoever the problem children are, Army needs to get their ass gone tomorrow - if not sooner.
Gee. Just what I want. Army making the changes. Her is the sole person responsible for creating this mess and the desire is to have him fix it? It's one thing if he was restricted on payroll. On of the highest payrolls in the league the past 2 seasons and will miss the playoffs both years. Complete failure on the past of the President of Hockey Operations & GM. His personality (or lack of) has infected the whole organization.

No thanks. His ass is the one who should be gone first.
Agreed. He wasn't rehired for a rebuild. A new GM with a vision needs to take over. I'm guessing if the Blues hit an abyss, and run off a serious losing streak that Army might actually get fired this season. But it will take a serious losing streak IMO to make that happen. The bottom of all bottoms - ha
I'm on the same page.... He's had total autonomy and plenty of money to spend, and they don't have a single player who wasn't either acquired or retained under his watch. This is 100% his team.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

21 by BlueinNy
BlueinNy wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:49 am Just think how you would feel if the team you were on let Hutton go for Johnson, Elliott go for Allen. There's no confidence between the pipes. As soon as they got into the shootout a few nights ago I new it was over, as did the team. Everyone focuses on the skaters, it's not them it's the shit show we've endured at goalie the last few years that is eroding their confidence. And at that point it's all Armstrong. That's just my opinion, but worse teams with better goaltending are way ahead of us in the league.
Hate quoting myself but, up comes Binnington.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

22 by RAFritchey
Southsidetony wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 9:17 am
Ozzies09tc wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:53 am
Southsidetony wrote: Fri Dec 07, 2018 7:23 am
I think the problem with Bergy was he was only a 30pt guy and to make 4mil a year
And who signed him to that contract?

Or steentangibles?

Or allen? (Tho recently he has been deserving)

I think we see where the problem is...
Steen's contract has to be the worst in a while.. 45 point guy getting about 6 mil a year.. Joe Pavelski and Tyler Segin make the same???? Both avg 63pts
And guys like James Neal, Brandon Dubinsky, Ryan Callahan, Jordan Eberle, Loui Eriksson, Milan Lucic, Jordan Staal, Derek Stepan, Ilya Kovalchuk, etc. make as much or more, too. My only problem with Steen's contract is the length. It should be about a year shorter, but that was to get the AAV down.

I think your observation is more a case of Pavelski's and Sequin's current contracts being huge discounts. Pavelski's an UFA after this, and he's going to get PAID. Seguin is already re-signed to 8 years/$78.8 mil after this season. That's more in line with what you'd expect.

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

24 by Dave's a mess
barnburner wrote: Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:08 am I have no idea as to what goes on in the room, but my observation of Steen is that I wish most of this team would match his intensity on the ice.
I agree wholeheartedly. Steen very well may be a problem in the room (or not), but putting in a good effort is almost never an issue with him.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!

Re: So who are the 'problem players?"

25 by Southsidetony
Steen has no skill is what I was observing with him.. You will not see him walk a guy.. I guess I just don’t like his play.. He’s too short and not skilled enough.. Other than having a good slap shot, I’m not sure what he really did for the Blues..
Heard Bobo and Sanford got into a fight in practice today.. Team is falling apart
Post Reply

Return to “Hockey”